We get a picture of the dangers of Calvinism when 17th Century Puritans hung fellow Christians on the Boston Common. Also remember Jonathan Edwards, a faithful pastor, was a slave holder while Wesley, who was born the same year, exhorted Wilborforce to press on in the battle over slavery.

And more recently, in one of the top blogs, Chailles did not know if Charles Colson was one of the elect and said that he attacked the Gospel.

We get a picture of the dangers of Calvinism when 17th Century Puritans hung fellow Christians on the Boston Common. Also remember Jonathan Edwards, a faithful pastor, was a slave holder while Wesley, who was born the same year, exhorted Wilborforce to press on in the battle over slavery.

And more recently, in one of the top blogs, Chailles did not know if Charles Colson was one of the elect and said that he attacked the Gospel.

Greetings Shodan,

Calvinism is dangerous because of the things you mention? Let us take Jonathan Edwards who was a congregationist, who did believe in Election, and the bondage of one's will to sin. If he own slaves I do not know, and personally, do not care, for there is nothing ungodly about that. Our corrupt society has convinced men that it is wrong, not the scriptures! One whole NT book speaks of it during Paul's time. Philemon, and Paul could have rebuke Philemon of it, if ideed it was wrong, but he never did, but exhorted Onesimus to return back to Philemon. Read it, it is very short. Abraham one of the most faithful and godly men in the scriptures had servants! In one sense, so do I. I owe a small company, and have men that work for me, who do as I ask them to do, whether in the company or at my house, it makes no difference, and they do as I ask them, an in whatever I ask them. I can show anyone a burying pace here in South Carolina, where a slave was lay to rest at the feet of his master, at his request! the words are on his tombstone are: "Here I lay at the feet of my master, whom I served and loved."

So please, do not condemn a doctrine base upon the way men live. Right or wrong, there are men in all faith that we could spot out and try to condemn the doctrine that they believe in~let us prove a system right or wrong, base upon the holy scriptures, not on those may hold the same doctrine, as the doctrine itself is corrupt. It may be, and it may not be.

The discussion of Limited Atonement is considerably muddled in its logic, simply demonstrating again that the "emperor has no clothes." The reasoning in response to the guy that read his question is circular in its entirety and sounds considerably political.

What is surprising is that so many people continue to believe this rot.

We get a picture of the dangers of Calvinism when 17th Century Puritans hung fellow Christians on the Boston Common. Also remember Jonathan Edwards, a faithful pastor, was a slave holder while Wesley, who was born the same year, exhorted Wilborforce to press on in the battle over slavery.

And more recently, in one of the top blogs, Chailles did not know if Charles Colson was one of the elect and said that he attacked the Gospel.

Greetings Shodan,

Calvinism is dangerous because of the things you mention? Let us take Jonathan Edwards who was a congregationist, who did believe in Election, and the bondage of one's will to sin. If he own slaves I do not know, and personally, do not care, for there is nothing ungodly about that. Our corrupt society has convinced men that it is wrong, not the scriptures! One whole NT book speaks of it during Paul's time. Philemon, and Paul could have rebuke Philemon of it, if ideed it was wrong, but he never did, but exhorted Onesimus to return back to Philemon. Read it, it is very short. Abraham one of the most faithful and godly men in the scriptures had servants! In one sense, so do I. I owe a small company, and have men that work for me, who do as I ask them to do, whether in the company or at my house, it makes no difference, and they do as I ask them, an in whatever I ask them. I can show anyone a burying pace here in South Carolina, where a slave was lay to rest at the feet of his master, at his request! the words are on his tombstone are: "Here I lay at the feet of my master, whom I served and loved."

So please, do not condemn a doctrine base upon the way men live. Right or wrong, there are men in all faith that we could spot out and try to condemn the doctrine that they believe in~let us prove a system right or wrong, base upon the holy scriptures, not on those may hold the same doctrine, as the doctrine itself is corrupt. It may be, and it may not be.

RB

You do not prove your case that slavery is wrong just because Paul did not speak against it.

What Pauls letter does prove is that bondage of chains is not the same as bondage of the heart. and to be a slave in this world but to be free in Christ is a better thing. Than to be a free man in this world and in bondage to sin and death.The whole civil rights movement in the USA in the light of scripture seems to have men free in one way but in bondage to 'human rights' The gospel seems to have been lost.Im not so sure much good was done as was and is claimed.It would have been better for the American government to have fought those opposed to the constitution that under God all men are created equal. and compelled all those states who still thought as they did before and after the civil war to conform . But they did not but were themselves compelled by protest marches . Not a good way for democracies.

You cannot suggest that slavery is right and good. The whole world lieth in the hands of the wicked one.Slavery is but a manifestation of that.But what does Paul say if you are a fre man and a master but a Christian then you are a slave and bound to Christ so act accordingly to your slaves.If you are slave and CHrists then you are a free man and thus to act as unto the Lord not as eye pleasers.

THATS historical and apostolic Christianity.

Calnism goes into error when they try take one doctrine and make all scripture fit into it. That's what ALL 'ISM's do. and they all fall into error doing it.